The Next Ron Paul?

Rep. Justin Amash takes on John Boehner and the "old GOP."

Justin Amash has been hailed as the “next Ron Paul.” Those are awfully high expectations for the Michigan Republican, now entering his second House term, and Amash knows it. “There is no next Ron Paul,” he told a Paul rally at the Republican National Convention. “He is one of a kind.”

Weeks before the next Congress even starts, Amash is already blazing his own path. Along with Kansas Republican Rep. Tim Huelskamp, he has been kicked off the House Budget Committee. Their sin? Last year they voted against their party’s official, Paul Ryan-crafted budget and supported a conservative alternative instead.

The alternative spending blueprint balanced the budget in five years. The latest Ryan plan didn’t achieve balance for another 23 years after that. Ryan’s handiwork only cleared the House Budget Committee—which he chairs—by a narrow 19-18 vote, thanks to these defections.

All told, four conservatives were stripped of their preferred committee assignments by the Republican leadership for not falling in line. Amidst reports that secret litmus tests and “score cards” were used to enforce party discipline, one Republican said the purged congressmen simply didn’t play well with others—something he civilly referred to as the “a—hole factor.”

Advertisement

Leslie Shedd, spokeswoman for Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, toldPolitico, “It had to do with their inability to work with other members, which some people might refer to as the a-hole factor.” (Shedd said her boss later conceded that he should have made a better choices of words, insisting, “he did not and would not call another member of Congress an a—hole.”)

“The fight has obscured an important shift in insider House politics, as these were the first members pulled off committees as punishment for political or personality reasons in nearly two decades,” Politico’s Jonathan Allen went on to report. “Even Tom DeLay, the fearsome majority leader known for hardball tactics, drew the line there.”

Amash is drawing a line of his own. He called his removal from the Budget Committee a “slap in the face.” He told reporters, “If Speaker Boehner wants to come back to my district, he’s not going to be met with very much welcome.” Amash even left the door open to supporting another candidate for speaker.

The dust-up could mark a turning point for Amash. During his freshman term, he carried on Ron Paul’s tradition of voting against bills not explicitly authorized by the Constitution and opposing wars that aren’t in America’s interest. But he was generally much more conciliatory toward leadership.

No more. Amash has been adamant that he lost his committee assignment without notice or explanation. And he hasn’t been shy about using his penchant for social networking websites to speak out, tweeting, “10 days since committee purge. Still no explanation from GOP leadership.”

Last week Amash’s Twitter feed read like a running indictment of the Republican establishment. “Personal attacks typify DC dysfunction,” he wrote. “Politicians find it easier to name-call than to respectfully explain own votes when they disagree.” He observed, “Only in Washington, DC, is a person taken off of the Budget Committee for wanting to balance the budget.”

“Old GOP doesn’t tolerate dissent or independent thinking,” the 32-year-old congressman continued. “New Republicans like me are open to people from all walks of life.” And he has become more aggressive in publicly challenging the leadership on issues, noting that Boehner was proposing an $18.4 trillion national debt by 2022 to Obama’s $18.9 trillion.

Slate’s David Weigel called this a “very un-Paul like” tactic. While the retiring Texas congressman was uncompromising in his votes, he was more mild-mannered in his public posture. Then again, Paul had an informal deal with the Republican leadership: the Good Doctor could vote however he wanted as long as he was civil in public and reliable on House procedures.

If the leadership is informing Amash and other independent-minded conservatives that this deal is off, it may be to the party’s detriment. The committee purge seems to have both elevated and further radicalized Amash and his colleagues, hardening them against Boehner’s team.

Party bosses may soon discover that it is better to have Amash inside the tent than making trouble outside it.

W. James Antle III is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a contributing editor to The American Conservative.Follow him on Twitter.

While Justin Amash is better than most Reps in Congress -and that’s not saying a lot these days – he still has a long way to go to before he can be correctly characterized as “the next Ron Paul.” He smartly says “‘there is no next Ron Paul,'” and he’s exactly right. Paul was incredibly consistent in his defense of Constitution. He was especially consistent on taxes – wanting them lowered, not increased.

The libertarian jury is till out on Amash, on the other hand. Amash says the following concerning taxes and the looming so-called fiscal cliff: “I don’t think it would be a good idea to raise tax rates…I am not going to take anything off the table if we can resolve some of our biggest issues as a country.” When Amash says he’s not willing “to take anything off the table” he means he’s willing to raise taxes to get a fiscal cliff deal done. Anyone who holds to libertarian views would advocate for lower taxes because it foster liberty in that American citizens wind up keeping more of their own money. More money is the last thing the government needs.

What exactly do they believe in – other than their own power, status and wealth of course?

Ever since Bill Clinton demonstrated that selling out core Democratic principles was the winning design, the number of what I think of as real Democrats has been dwindling. I must say that I miss the old principled Democrats. You felt they actually stood for something, honorable opponents and a real American type, their many defects notwithstanding. You felt that underneath it all there lay a shared sense of decency, even of identity. No more.

‘Slate’s David Weigel called this a “very un-Paul like” tactic. While the retiring Texas congressman was uncompromising in his votes, he was more mild-mannered in his public posture.’

Ron Paul just has a mild-mannered personality than most. I am glad he is what he is because he is obviously comfortable in his own skin. This is important. Let Mr Amash be comfortable in his own skin. And it’s not like Ron Paul gets the respect he deserves from the GOP!

I agree with Rep. Amash that nothing should be taken off the table. If Democrats and Republicans draw a line in the sand regarding political ideology, no agreement will occur. I agree a bad agreement is worse than no agreement but there will come a time soon when we can’t have temporary resolutions and something permanent will have to be passed.

I think unquestioning attachment to and defense of “the Constitution” is as brain-dead as anything else. A 230 or so year old document written at a time when the U.S. was a much simpler place, and “the world” was something like spermatozoid, has no credibility outside of tradition and….less…. The burgeoning circumventing of any core morality and purity of purpose contained in the Constitution smirks at the core of question-begging intellectual analysis. A single partisan figurehead, elected or otherwise, combined with not only partisan legislators, but a partisan JUDICIAL branch, come on, let’s get real here. The Constitution is long in need of serious revision or overhaul. Amash and the like, or on the other side, Dennis Kucinich-ists mistake outdated moral conviction for workable revolution. The era of Lincoln era clear cut morality-based directions is ancient history. Pragmatism is the new morality.

@Spiritist. Dedication to the constitution is the ONLY true moral stance for Washington conservatives. You act like the constitution is set in stone. In fact if a law needs to change with the times(and I personally dont see any) then an ammendment can be added to the constitution. It takes a 3/4 vote of congress to do so…but all that does is guarantee that people need to be unaminous on the law in question. This is a good thing…I think congress would be much better of if ALL laws needed a 3/4 majority to pass. Sure fewer laws would pass, but doing it that way would ensure a smaller federal government more representative of the majority of Americans. When 51% can take away the rights of 49% through new laws…thats just disgusting.

Those who aren’t willing to raise taxes to get a deal are fooling themselves. Every dollar that is spent is now taxed or printed (we used to borrow, but now the Fed is printing about the amount of the deficit). So if we can get REAL spending cuts, that is valuable. 2 points on the tax increases. #1 they are so poorly designed, they will likely bring in no income. #2 any income they do bring in will mean a reduction in the INFLATION tax, so overall taxes will be constant (lower if REAL spending cuts happen).

“Anyone who holds to libertarian views would advocate for lower taxes because it foster liberty in that American citizens wind up keeping more of their own money.”
I’m extremely libertarian and I disagree. The beast cannot be starved. An attempt to starve it is stealing from the yet to be born. Balance the budget at all costs; it’s better that we mutilate ourselves than our descendents.

The pratice of approving unsustainable deficits in the name of anything (such as low tax rates) is HYPOCRTICAL. The Libertarian litmus test should be to NOT pass on deficits which end up being future taxes and larger government to future generations. We need to support Amash and those like him who recognize the time to stop this is now. If Republicans like Boehner want lower taxes (like they should), they need to be coupled with tough lower spending choices, and they need to do it now. If not, then do what it takes to balance the budget, so we have a future shot at solvency.